On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 10:25:21AM -0400, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > On 6/28/06, Thomas Bruderer <bruthoma at student.ethz.ch> wrote: > [snip] > >Well if there is no need for a darknet, why we talk about it? Either there > >is a > >need, and it was good you built a darknet. Or nobody wants a darknet and > >there > >never will be success with darknet. > [snip] > > If darknet is only used by people who need it then it's users will > have only weak anonymity. > You can't hide in a crowd of one. > > Freenet will always be of greatest interest to people with an uncommon > interest in privacy, and privacy technology. Personally I found > darknet freenet more enjoyable to run because it wasn't quite so > automagic. :) That it gave me an incentive to keep nagging all my > friends to keep their nodes up to date and running (at least until the > software just stopped working for me) is another advantage of the > model.
"Just stopped working for me" ? You have reported this on support? Which email? > > I understand the need for more inclusive systems.. but please don't > make darknet useless by seperating the freenet universe into seperate > opennet/darknet worlds. We decided some time ago that we will have to have a hybrid model, although splitting the two was my preference for various reasons, and it would have been possible to migrate specific content between the two without the author's involvement. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060713/caa8f120/attachment.pgp>
